Groups Sue To Limit Quota On Shark-fishing

Leaping to the defense of one of the least cuddly creatures on Earth, two environmental groups have gone to court to force the federal government to impose tighter restrictions on shark fishing.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Tampa, the Ocean Conservancy and the National Audubon Society accuse the National Marine Fisheries Service of caving in to the fishing industry by increasing quotas for sandbar, dusky, blacktip and other large coastal sharks.

The battle is taking place over species that were commercially irrelevant until the late 1970s. But with the opening of markets in China, where shark fin soup is a delicacy, U.S. exports of fins soared. And markets in Mexico and other countries provided outlets for the meat. Today, about 100 shark boats work the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico, about half of them in Florida.

Despite their fearsome reputation, sharks have had a difficult time coping with the modern world of high-tech fishing. As top predators, they live for decades, mature late and bear few young. They can't quickly replace population losses.

"They're very vulnerable," said Sonja Fordham, shark conservation specialist at the Ocean Conservancy. "Yet they have this unfortunate reputation of being man-eaters or pests or trash, so there's just a low level of priority for research or management compared to more popular fish."

The environmental groups that filed suit were once allies of the fisheries service as it tried to restrict shark fishing. But last year, the agency settled a lawsuit with the shark fishing industry that required it to allow independent experts to review a pessimistic assessment of the shark population. That assessment had led the agency to attempt to cut the annual shark quota by 36 percent to 898 tons.

After four experts found fault with either the mathematical models or the quality of the shark assessment data, the fisheries service loosened the quota to 1,414 tons a year.

FOR THE RECORD - CORRECTION PUBLISHED THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 2002.A story on Page 1B of Tuesday's editions misstated the status of federal shark-fishing rules. While a lower quota had been announced, it had never been implemented due to litigation between the federal government and the shark-fishing industry. The quota of 1,414 tons a year remains in effect. We regret the error.

In the lawsuit filed Friday, the environmental groups contend that the fisheries service was wrong to loosen the quotas. They say the agency should not have delegated its authority to an outside panel. Even if the most recent assessment was flawed, they say it constituted the best available science, which the agency is required by law to use. And they say the entire process was conducted with too much secrecy.

The lawsuit asks the judge to force the agency to reinstate its tighter quota and to stop relying on outside experts.

Chris Rogers, director of the agency's highly migratory species division, said he had no choice but to loosen the restrictions, under the agency's settlement with the fishing industry. He said quotas will last only until the agency can conduct a new stock assessment over the next several months, and that is where the environmental groups should focus their attention.

"This lawsuit is counterproductive," he said. "We'd all be better served handling this out of the courtroom. Given the concerns about the data used and the models chosen, we thought the best way to move forward would be to have as robust and transparent a process as possible."

Bob Spaeth, who owns four shark boats that work Florida waters, said the lawsuit showed the environmentalists were simply uninterested in reaching a science-based consensus on fishing levels. The federal government is preparing a new assessment of the shark stock, and that is the place to discuss it, he said.

"Obviously, these people are hell-bent -- whether the science is any good or not -- on shutting down shark fishing," said Spaeth, executive director of the Southern Offshore Fishing Association, which had settled the lawsuit with the federal government requiring peer reviews. "I think the fishing community is ready to get some new science, get the people at the table and find out where the stock stands."

Like other shark fishermen, Spaeth linked the recent rise in reported shark attacks to the past few years of federal restrictions on fishing. And now that the federal government is allowing them to catch more sharks, he said, we may be spared the record-setting levels of shark attacks of the past few years.

"I think you'll see the attacks come down a bit," he said. "The more sharks are out there, the more people swimming, the more are going to get bitten."

But George Burgess, director of the International Shark Attack File in Gainesville, said it is simplistic to link shark attacks to tighter fishing quotas. The reason attacks appear to be up is partly because more agencies report them to his organization and partly because of population increases in Florida and other states with popular beaches.

"The fact is that the trend in shark attacks is mirroring the rise in human population," he said. "It's sad to see people making this into something political."

Burgess, a shark biologist, said shark populations appear to have increased since 1993, when the federal government first imposed quotas. But he said shark numbers remain far below levels of 25 years ago.

"We know recovery is happening, but the big debate is whether it's fast enough," he said. "The environmentalists say it's not fast enough. That's why they filed the lawsuit. You talk to the folks on the other side, the commercial fishermen, and they'll say there are much more out there. Those are the two extremes."

David Fleshler can be reached at dfleshler@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4535.